You are comparing a brand who make one/two pair of shoes from an hide, with a brand which use even the last millimeter of those expensive leather.
Obviusly JL select the denser and better part of the hide for his vamps, with Meermin is only a matter of luck, some pair can be perfect, others very poor.

Anyway the creases on your Meermin are perfectly acceptable.

Thanks, I am sure is not only the leather (this leather is not bad at all, but of course in not JL). . And yes, I do not care too much as far the fit is good.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DWFII

All manner of considerations enter into this--the length of the caps; depth of the forepart of the last; width of the insole; the quality and substance of the vamp / upper leather; the quality and thickness of the lining leather; the underlying structure... such as whether there are mid-liners or not...the structure and articulation of your feet.

Foot to foot...nevermind the shoes themselves... even if your feet are exactly the same length, there can be discrepancies in the way the shoes crease. And if one foot is even slightly longer than the other (and almost every one has such feet) it is almost a guarantee that the shoes will crease differently.

I suspect the business with feet is self evident but combined with the aspects of the shoes that are different and the best one can usually hope for is "similar."

Thanks, I think the depth of the forepart (first think I thought about) and the lenght/width of the toe cap play a great roll together with the quality of the leather.

@DWFII
I'd been reading around the topic of scotch grain leather and come across this long dead thread on SF with this post (referencing another post from a different forum), that I had found interesting.

What is your opinion on this? Any idea as to the veracity of this claim?
I'd always thought scotch grain leather was just another form of embossed leather, didn't think it had such a "charming" origin.

@DWFII
I'd been reading around the topic of scotch grain leather and come across this long dead thread on SF with this post (referencing another post from a different forum), that I had found interesting.

What is your opinion on this? Any idea as to the veracity of this claim?
I'd always thought scotch grain leather was just another form of embossed leather, didn't think it had such a "charming" origin.

I don't know...I wasn't there.

I've heard the stories. That said, it's worth noting that even the linked post suggests that most modern Scotch Grain is embossed between rollers.

Myself...as intimately as I am engaged with leather I feel deeply that using perfectly good Scotch (esp. an Islay) to texturize leather would be damn near a sacrilege.

If the stories have any truth to them, one has to wonder "what were they thinking!?"

As someone who has a bunch of Horween Scotch Grain scrap on my shelves, I can attest that the modern stuff is, indeed, embossed with that pattern. If I read that correctly they didn't waste good Scotch but used the leftover barley mash (a by product), mainly to preserve the hides, I think the texture was just a bonus. This is also inline with the stereotype of Scotts being cheap, figuring out how to use the leftover mash.

As someone who has a bunch of Horween Scotch Grain scrap on my shelves, I can attest that the modern stuff is, indeed, embossed with that pattern. If I read that correctly they didn't waste good Scotch but used the leftover barley mash (a by product), mainly to preserve the hides, I think the texture was just a bonus. This is also inline with the stereotype of Scotts being cheap, figuring out how to use the leftover mash.

I'm mostly speculating but I cannot, for the life of me, imagine how the barley mash would preserve the hides. Today it is often fed to animals...which suggests it is subject to breakdown by the same sorts of bacteria that would process and break down any organic material. Including animal skins.

Common modern tanning methods: Veg-tan uses various plant materials, chrome tan uses chromium salts, but "brain tanning" is also a thing- it uses animal brains, urine has also been used since Biblical times as well. I'm not sure our how the mash would work but given the other things used, there maybe something in there that would work, though I doubt it's being done on an industrial scale, if at all.

Leather tanning can use a lot of strange things...
Common modern tanning methods: Veg-tan uses various plant materials, chrome tan uses chromium salts, but "brain tanning" is also a thing- it uses animal brains, urine has also been used since Biblical times as well. I'm not sure our how the mash would work but given the other things used, there maybe something in there that would work, though I doubt it's being done on an industrial scale, if at all.

Brain tanning is dependent on the smoke to create an environment inimical to the growth of bacteria. Veg tanning depends on the tannic acid derived from certain barks of plants. Urine depends on uric acid. Etc.. All inhibit the dissolution / breakdown of the flesh.

"I'm a shoemaker Jim, not a chemist"--all I'm saying is that there are a lot of these "stories" that float around esp. on the Internet but most of them are apocryphal. Urban legend. BS.

Brain tanning is dependent on the smoke to create an environment inimical to the growth of bacteria. Veg tanning depends on the tannic acid derived from certain barks of plants. Urine depends on uric acid. Etc.. All inhibit the dissolution / breakdown of the flesh.

"I'm a shoemaker Jim, not a chemist"--all I'm saying is that there are a lot of these "stories" that float around esp. on the Internet but most of them are apocryphal. Urban legend. BS.

"Photographs or it never happened."

Since the product doesn't seem to actual exist now, you're probably right. Shoe making has always impressed me, totally different branch of the leather-working tree. I laugh when people ask if I could make them a pair of shoes...yes but they wouldn't look good, fit, or be comfortable...

Brain tanning is dependent on the smoke to create an environment inimical to the growth of bacteria. Veg tanning depends on the tannic acid derived from certain barks of plants. Urine depends on uric acid. Etc.. All inhibit the dissolution / breakdown of the flesh.

"I'm a shoemaker Jim, not a chemist"--all I'm saying is that there are a lot of these "stories" that float around esp. on the Internet but most of them are apocryphal. Urban legend. BS.

"Photographs or it never happened."

Certainly not a leather tanner, but ....

Tanning is not simply the coating/immersion of the rawhide in a solution of bacteria-killing ingredients. The tanning process changes the chemical structure of the leather, such that the collagen fibers present in the hide cross-link (perhaps in combination with the tanning agent). Also, one can eat acorns, which are often used for veg-tanning, so the edibility of a tanning agent is no proof that it cannot tan leather.

Still, I'm not saying I believe the Scotch tanning story alluded to earlier. Seem dubious to me, but not impossible. Given the presence of tannins in grape skins, it would seem more likely one could do this with grape must left over from winemaking....

I'm not a leather chemist either so I could very easily be wrong (said at the beginning that I was "speculating") but it is, AFAIK, the tannic acid that causes that cross linking. Even in a leather such as chamois, which is "tanned" (or perhaps more properly "tawed") with fish oil, it is the fatty acids which do the critical work.

And FWTW, I haven't tried, but I'm pretty sure you have to boil acorns before they are edible...and discard the boil water--presumably a process which ameliorates the toxicity of the chemicals in the acorn.

All that said, and to return to the point...while not an expert in this regard either...in my younger years, I brewed ales and beers extensively, albeit at home (and incidentally wine). I am intimately familiar with barley mash. I just can't see it having any preservative properties.

Chemist, here (specifically polymer chemistry). There's a ton of different molecules and substances capable of cross linking. Of course, this is depends on what is the substrate being cross-linked. With regards to an animal skin specifically, surely some will be more efficient than others, and it's certainly possible that barley mash or scotch or whatever has chemicals in it capable of cross-linking the collagen units (protein) in an animal skin. I don't know what exactly is in barley mash, but I'd be shocked if it didn't have some molecule capable of cross-linking.

With all due respect DWF, your experience with barley mash and "just not being able to see" it's ability to preserve a skin isn't more than just a feeling. Repurposing side-products is very common. There's a famous example from the pharmaceutical industry: scientists were running clinical trials on a drug called Sildenafil with the intent to lower blood pressure. It worked fine to lower blood pressure, but a common side effect that patients reported was increased sexual drive and treating erectile disfunction. That drug is now called Viagra, and the rest is history.

Here's a good picture of what cross linking is: imagine that each of the polymer chains are a collagen molecule, with each cross link being a molecule of tannic acid, chromium salt, or whatever other molecule has the capability to bind one protein to another like a bridge.

Chemist, here (specifically polymer chemistry). There's a ton of different molecules and substances capable of cross linking. Of course, this is depends on what is the substrate being cross-linked. With regards to an animal skin specifically, surely some will be more efficient than others, and it's certainly possible that barley mash or scotch or whatever has chemicals in it capable of cross-linking the collagen units (protein) in an animal skin. I don't know what exactly is in barley mash, but I'd be shocked if it didn't have some molecule capable of cross-linking.

With all due respect DWF, your experience with barley mash and "just not being able to see" it's ability to preserve a skin isn't more than just a feeling. Repurposing side-products is very common. There's a famous example from the pharmaceutical industry: scientists were running clinical trials on a drug called Sildenafil with the intent to lower blood pressure. It worked fine to lower blood pressure, but a common side effect that patients reported was increased sexual drive and treating erectile disfunction. That drug is now called Viagra, and the rest is history.

Here's a good picture of what cross linking is: imagine that each of the polymer chains are a collagen molecule, with each cross link being a molecule of tannic acid, chromium salt, or whatever other molecule has the capability to bind one protein to another like a bridge.

Thank you for that.

So...not daunted but willing to learn, despite my "feelings" about barley mash, tell me what chemical in barley mash would be capable of doing this. AFAIK, barley mash consists primarily of starch and some residual maltose and a lot of dead (suicidal) yeast...and perhaps a small amount of alcohol.

With all due respect DWF, your experience with barley mash and "just not being able to see" it's ability to preserve a skin isn't more than just a feeling. Repurposing side-products is very common. There's a famous example from the pharmaceutical industry: scientists were running clinical trials on a drug called Sildenafil with the intent to lower blood pressure. It worked fine to lower blood pressure, but a common side effect that patients reported was increased sexual drive and treating erectile disfunction. That drug is now called Viagra, and the rest is history.

I digress.

But just for the record, Viagra is a PDE5 inhibitor. It has an effect on blood flow in the penis but does not do anything to one's sexual drive.

You're right though, the discovery of its use as a form of treatment for erectile dysfunction was completely serendipitous.

But just for the record, Viagra is a PDE5 inhibitor. It has an effect on blood flow in the penis but does not do anything to one's sexual drive.

Certainly the case, just remember being told the story by a professor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DWFII

Thank you for that.

So...not daunted but willing to learn, despite my "feelings" about barley mash, tell me what chemical in barley mash would be capable of doing this. AFAIK, barley mash consists primarily of starch and some residual maltose and a lot of dead (suicidal) yeast...and perhaps a small amount of alcohol.

Will Everclear create cross links?

Frankly I don't know what is in barley mash. But I know there's small amount of different acids in just about everything, wouldn't be surprised if barley mash has it as well, especially if there's yeast cells in the mix.